In a law review article entitled “The Death of the Genus Claim,”
1 which published in the aftermath of the Federal Circuit decision in
Idenix v. Gilead, 941 F.3d 1149 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the authors stated that, “in the past thirty years, there are virtually no significant examples of genus claims in the life science fields upheld on appeal as compliant with § 112(a) outside the unique context of . . . ‘interference” proceedings.’” The authors accused the Federal Circuit of “abandon[ing] a practical focus on whether others could make use of the claimed invention in favor of a fruitless search for the exact boundaries of that invention” and characterized the court’s “‘full scope possession’ theory [as] invalidat[ing] a genus claim unless the patent can show exactly which species within the genus will work as intended.”
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
This 3-part series of posts examines the benefits, disadvantages, and pitfalls concerning nonpublication requests for patent applications. Part 1 of this series focuses on the general procedure and benefits of not publishing a patent application.
Filing a patent application is critical for many companies to protect their intellectual property. By default, most patent applications are published around eighteen months from the earliest filing date for which a priority benefit is sought.
1 However, there are a number of exceptions under which a patent application will not be published, including: (i) if the patent application is no longer pending (e.g., expressly abandoned or issued as a patent), (ii) the patent application is national security classified, subject to a secrecy order, or under nation security review, (iii) the patent application is a provisional patent application, (iv) the patent application is a design pat
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
As the world pivoted to navigate obstacles brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, the USPTO not only adapted to address the challenges, but appeared to make the most of this period by improving existing procedures. Widely publicized adjustments, such as efficiently moving 13,000 examiners and other employees to a remote working environment
1 and reducing the average examination time
2, overshadow equally laudable advances that have resulted in more robust and streamlined examination, with a seeming aim at achieving improved customer service toward its applicants and stronger international partnerships. This article summarizes five procedural developments that have greatly impacted U.S. prosecution, and in many instances, improved the experience for USPTO customers.
Tech
your username
January 7, 2021
On Wednesday, Apple Inc. filed an opposition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board against applicant Pod Shedz LLCâs application for the PODSHEDZ mark, citing consumer confusion and dilution over the use of âPODâ in its mark in relation to Appleâs -POD family of marks.
Apple noted that it âowned and used a family of marks for audio devices that each share the suffix âPOD,â â including iPod, EarPods, AirPods, AirPods Pro, and HomePod (the â-POD family of marksâ), which share the Pod formative characteristic, before the applicant applied to register its trademark. Apple contended that since 2001 it has used the -POD family of marks, at first in connection with the iPod mark for its handheld digital music player. The applicant filed its application on October 12, 2019, in Class 9, to cover â(e)arphone accessories, namely, earphone cases; Protective cases for audio equipment in the nature
Cost Breakthrough in Department of Energy Loan Guarantees
Share Article
The Alternative Fuels & Chemicals Coalition (“AFCC”) worked closely with policy makers and appropriators this year to provide changes to the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”)’s Title XVII Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program (the “Title XVII Program”), which were realized through the recent enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021.
This bipartisan package will foster innovation across the board on a range of technologies that are critical to our energy and national security, our long-term economic competitiveness, and the protection of our environment. WASHINGTON (PRWEB) December 31, 2020 The Alternative Fuels & Chemicals Coalition (“AFCC”) (founded by Mark J. Riedy, Partner, Kilpatrick Townsend Stockton and AFCC General Counsel, CJ Evans, Managing Director, American Diversified Energy and AFCC Execu